# Thread: My Solution to The Three Body Problem

1. I think I have discovered the solution to the three body problem.The first solution to the three body problem is to combine two gravitational bodies as one to set them equal to the third. The second solution is to split the third in half and treat it as two gravitational bodies so that each can be set equal to one of the other two, and then combine each set of two so that the final equation can be balanced. This also solves all versions of the three body problem. One example of the three body problem being solved is the eight body problem. If you have to equalize eight gravitational bodies, the solution is to add them to each other in groups of two and then do it again in groups of 4 and then do it again in a final group of two. If you have to equalize an uneven number like nine, you can combine two of them and then solve for the remaining eight. What do you all think of my solution to the three body problem?

2.

3. Originally Posted by Michael Champion
I think I have discovered the solution to the three body problem.The first solution to the three body problem is to combine two gravitational bodies as one to set them equal to the third. The second solution is to split the third in half and treat it as two gravitational bodies so that each can be set equal to one of the other two, and then combine each set of two so that the final equation can be balanced. This also solves all versions of the three body problem. One example of the three body problem being solved is the eight body problem. If you have to equalize eight gravitational bodies, the solution is to add them to each other in groups of two and then do it again in groups of 4 and then do it again in a final group of two. If you have to equalize an uneven number like nine, you can combine two of them and then solve for the remaining eight. What do you all think of my solution to the three body problem?
Your description makes no sense, I'm sorry to say. I have no clue what is being "equalized", nor why it enables the solution. I certainly don't see from your description how chaos can emerge.

Try explaining more clearly -- perhaps with a worked example -- exactly how your idea is supposed to work. Then we can show you precisely where you go wrong.

4. For example, if you combine 2x=3y and 3y=4z you get 2x+3y=4z+3y and then you get 2x=4z which is x=2z and z=0.5x and y=2/3x. Therefore the equation resolves as x=2(0.5x). However, what if I added a third equation to the mix? Let's say 3a=6b. Then i would resolve the three body problem by adding x=x to 3a=6b. First, I solve the second equation for its variables. 3a=6/3b. a=2/3b. b=1/2a. Then I do something normally impossible and solve the three body problem by setting only one side equal to only one half of the other side. Therefore, the equation is now x=3a. If I solve for a, I get a=1/3x. Then the next one sided equation resolves as x=6b, which is b=1/6x. This solves for all of the variables in the equations and solves the three body problem for this example. Let me know if i got anything wrong.

5. Originally Posted by Michael Champion
For example, if you combine 2x=3y and 3y=4z you get 2x+3y=4z+3y and then you get 2x=4z which is x=2z and z=0.5x and y=2/3x. Therefore the equation resolves as x=2(0.5x). However, what if I added a third equation to the mix? Let's say 3a=6b. Then i would resolve the three body problem by adding x=x to 3a=6b. First, I solve the second equation for its variables. 3a=6/3b. a=2/3b. b=1/2a. Then I do something normally impossible and solve the three body problem by setting only one side equal to only one half of the other side. Therefore, the equation is now x=3a. If I solve for a, I get a=1/3x. Then the next one sided equation resolves as x=6b, which is b=1/6x. This solves for all of the variables in the equations and solves the three body problem for this example. Let me know if i got anything wrong.
Perhaps you should explain to us what you think the three-body problem is.

6. The three body problem is the problem that exists when you try to calculate the gravitational difference between three different bodies at once. It is impossible to calculate for all of the variables in a three body problem equation normally except through the method i just showed. I don't see what else I need to explain.

7. Originally Posted by Michael Champion
The three body problem is the problem that exists when you try to calculate the gravitational difference between three different bodies at once. It is impossible to calculate for all of the variables in a three body problem equation normally except through the method i just showed. I don't see what else I need to explain.
You may wish to Google for the term. You have at best an incomplete knowledge of what the problem is.

8. Does my example work?

9. Originally Posted by Michael Champion
Does my example work?
Perhaps you should read the Wikipedia article titled "three-body problem" and tell us if you still think your example is in any way a solution to the three-body problem.

10. Your proposed solution for the three-body problem is not a valid one. The three-body problem is a complex problem in celestial mechanics, and the motion of three celestial objects interacting under gravity cannot be reduced to a simple combination or division of the masses involved. The motion of three celestial objects is determined by the mutual gravitational attraction between them, and the equations that describe this motion are highly nonlinear and cannot be solved analytically.
The three-body problem has been studied extensively by mathematicians and physicists, and while there have been some special solutions found, there is no general solution to the three-body problem. The problem is considered to be one of the most difficult open problems in classical mechanics.
The n-body problem, which is the generalization of the three-body problem for n celestial objects, is still an active area of research and no simple solutions have been found to date. While your idea of combining or dividing the masses might work for certain simplified scenarios, it is not a general solution for the n-body problem.

11. I still don't see how my example is wrong mathematically, but alright, I'm fine with the fact that i don't understand the full math of the n-body problem.

12. Originally Posted by Michael Champion
I still don't see how my example is wrong mathematically, but alright, I'm fine with the fact that i don't understand the full math of the n-body problem.
Your math is "not even wrong" -- it is irrelevant to the three-body problem. Did you read the Wikipedia article? If you had, you would've seen that you do not understand what the problem is. It's not so much that you don't "understand the full math" of the problem. Rather, you don't know what the problem is.

It's as if I were to say that I had unified quantum mechanics and general relativity by multiplying 5 by 4 and getting 20. My equation is right, but it has nothing to do with the problem.

 Bookmarks
##### Bookmarks
 Posting Permissions
 You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts   BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On [VIDEO] code is On HTML code is Off Trackbacks are Off Pingbacks are Off Refbacks are On Terms of Use Agreement